Self-control is commonly assumed to depend on executive functions (EFs). However, it is unclear whether real-life self-control failures result from deficient EF competencies or rather reflect insufficient conflict-induced mobilization of executive control, and whether self-control depends more critically on function-specific EF competencies or general executive functioning (GEF), that is, common competencies that underlie all EFs. Here we investigated whether failure-related action versus state orientation, a personality trait related to the conflict-induced mobilization of cognitive control, moderates the effect of general and function-specific control competencies on self-control. To this end, 240 young adults completed questionnaire measures of action-state orientation and trait self-control, reported everyday self-control failures during 7 consecutive days via smartphone-based experience sampling, and completed 9 EF tasks from which latent variables reflecting GEF as well as inhibition-, updating-, and shifting-specific competencies were derived. Structural equation models confirmed that the effect of GEF on self-control was moderated by action-state orientation: action-oriented compared with more state-oriented participants showed a stronger inverse association between GEF and everyday self-control failures. Corresponding effects of function-specific competencies on self-control were not found. These results highlight that high executive functioning may enable self-controlled behavior only if control is sufficiently mobilized when needed and suggest that self-control may depend more critically on general than function-specific control competencies. More generally, the present study demonstrates the fruitfulness of combining latentvariable models of well-controlled EF tasks with experience sampling of daily self-control and measures of individual differences in control modes to bridge the gap between laboratory research and real-life behavior.